HAVANA, Aug 16, 2010 (IPS) - "I still view corruption as an extraordinarydanger" to the country, as its "corrosive power" makes it a matter of"national security," said Esteban Morales, who was expelled from the CubanCommunist Party (PCC) after publishing an article warning of its pervasiveeffects.

Morales has appealed to the PCC, in accordance with his rights under thestatutes of the ruling party, which is the only political party recognisedin Cuba.

"A commission has to analyse the appeal and make a decision. If I am notsatisfied with the decision, I can take the case as far as the partycongress. I will continue to appeal, because I think I have good reasons todo so," he told IPS in this interview.

Meanwhile he remains "very active" as an academic and researcher, althoughhe will retire in September from the teaching staff at the Centre for theStudy of the Hemisphere and the United States (CEHSEU) at the University ofHavana, which he helped to found and to which he has devoted a large partof his professional life.

"I'm retiring at 68. I'll have more time and freedom for my academic workand research," said Morales, who holds doctorates in science and economicsand is an expert on Cuba-U.S. relations, as well as the author of essays,books and numerous articles on the equally sensitive subject of racism inhis country.

Q: Since your separation from the PCC was made public, you have preferredto avoid contact with the press, especially foreign journalists. What madeyou change your mind and agree to this interview?

A: I think it is salutary to clear up certain points. Some people have saidI was a privileged person, a security (secret service) agent, and now Iwish to say this: No one will ever unearth any privileges of mine, becauseI have none. As for being a security agent, if I were, I would be proud ofit, because in Cuba that is an honour.

My curriculum vitae is what speaks for me. I am a true academic, not aninvented one. I have written dozens of works, not always on straightforwardsubjects, as well as doing a lot of teaching, lecturing at conferences andacting as an academic adviser. If anyone has any doubts, they need onlyenter my name into Google.

Others have taken delight in the idea that I might change sides and go overto the "dissidents." Perhaps the counter-revolution, lacking as they are inleadership, thought that I could fill that gap for them. But people whoreally know me, know that that's impossible, and that I'm a firmlycommitted, tenacious revolutionary. Furthermore, I have never had anypretensions to leadership or sought to be the centre of attention.

Q: Have you never wavered in your political convictions?

A: No, never. Even the sun has its sunspots; different evaluations arealways possible. I may have given room to mistaken interpretations,although the spirit of the things I have written is clear, and they clearlycome from a revolutionary position.

I was a revolutionary before I was a party activist, and I will continue tobe one. I decided my political stance over 50 years ago, and it was my freechoice. I have never liked to play the lying game.

I am not paralysed by what has happened. I will simply be much more carefulabout how I express myself and what I write, but I won't stop doing it. I'man intellectual whom the revolution has trained to warn honestly aboutthings that can damage us, and that is what I have always done. These arethe risks one just has to run.

Q: Doesn't the fact of your punishment, after you publicly expressed yourviews on corruption and the risks it poses for the country's political andsocial stability, contradict President Raúl Castro himself, who said Aug. 1that unity "is nurtured and harvested within the broadest possiblesocialist democracy and in open discussion of every issue, howeversensitive, with the people"?

A: I believe debate and criticism are being encouraged by Raúl and theparty leadership. But there may be circumstances in which someone at somelevel does not quite agree.

I must say that exercising a critical approach is much more complex thanthe mere decision to do so. It has to do with the structures, thepersonalities and the different understandings people sometimes have ofthings. Or perhaps part of what I said could have been said in a differentway. There's a big gap between intentions and the way they are put intopractice.

Q: What do you think is most worrying about corruption?

A: Its corrosive effect from the moral perspective. When morality andethics are affected, the prestige of our political system is undermined andeverything goes downhill. That's why I agree with those who say corruptionis a national security problem.

However, it won't be solved just through more inspections and paperwork,but by being on the alert and creating mechanisms to prevent it, so thatpeople who handle money and resources are constantly held accountable. Ourcountry's assets really do belong to the people, it's not just talk.

Q: You are very well known for your work on the United States and itsrelations with Cuba, and on racism. What prompted you to write aboutcorruption, an issue that, according to some government sectors, encouragescampaigns to discredit the country if ventilated in public?

A: I wrote those articles because I believe these are the problems we arefacing now. I have a motto: in the context of what we have lived throughover all these years, I think whoever wants to be a revolutionary has towage his own war, fight his own battles and run whatever risks there are.Otherwise he should just stay home and hide under the bed.

The claim that the enemy will take advantage of an open discussion ofcorruption does not immobilise me either, because it isn't the enemy thatis going to solve the problem for us: quite the contrary. I am one of thosewho think that sometimes it is healthier for us to recognise ourshortcomings ourselves, than for the enemy to fling them back in our teeth,or save them up against us, which would be worse.

Q: Who are you referring to when you say "enemy"?

A: We cannot close our eyes to the fact that since the late 1980s, thefocus of U.S. policy towards Cuba has changed. Nowadays, everything that ishappening internally on the island is being observed and monitored by U.S.politicians and especially by the United States' special services.

It is against this backdrop that I view the problem of corruption, which Istill see as an extraordinary danger. (END)

.

Patricia

CUBA-USTourism and 'Cuban Five' Top AgendaBy Patricia Grogg

HAVANA, Aug 17, 2010 (IPS) - Cuba is getting ready to welcome tourists fromthe United States, in the event that the ban on travel by U.S. citizens tothis Caribbean island nation is lifted, as well as clamouring more loudlyfor a presidential pardon for the five Cuban agents who have spent the last12 years in U.S. prisons.

Although the state of bilateral relations appears too fragile to supportsuch a change, rumours have been circulating about contacts taking placethat could lead to the freeing of U.S. government contractor Alan Gross,jailed and under investigation in Havana, and a ticket home for "The CubanFive", as the agents are known.

Gross, a Jewish American, was arrested in Cuba on Dec. 3, 2009 and accusedof espionage for distributing laptops, mobile phones and satelliteequipment for internet connections, for subversive purposes according tothe authorities.

The five Cubans -- Gerardo Hernández, Ramón Labañino, Antonio Guerrero,Fernando González and René González -- are serving lengthy sentences indifferent U.S. prisons after being arrested in 1998 and sentenced in 2001.

In 2005, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions declaredthat the deprivation of liberty of the five men was arbitrary and urged theU.S. government to take steps to remedy the situation.

The five were convicted of espionage, although the prosecution failed toprove that any of them had obtained documents considered secret orsensitive by the U.S. security services.

In Cuba they are hailed as heroes in the fight against terrorism, becausethey had infiltrated and were monitoring anti-Castro Cuban exile groups inMiami, Florida.

In recent weeks, former president Fidel Castro, apparently recovered fromthe serious illness that led to his stepping down from government fouryears ago, has raised expectations about the possibility that the CubanFive may be freed "by the end of the year." Washington, in turn, isinsisting on Gross's release on humanitarian grounds.

The conflict between Washington and Havana, and the U.S. embargo againstCuba, have lasted for nearly half a century.

In the view of Arturo López Levy, a Cuban émigré to the United States and aprofessor and researcher at the University of Denver, the release of theCuban Five will become a more likely possibility to the extent that the twogovernments "negotiate constructively" on other strategic issues of mutualconcern.

"If progress is made on matters of greater bilateral interest, whichconvinces government agencies in charge of foreign policy that the releaseswould be a rational move, it would make no sense to block that progressjust to keep hold of prisoners whose trial was tarnished by dubiousstandards of justice and impartiality," López Levy told IPS by e-mail.

Esteban Morales, a Cuban academic expert on Cuba-U.S. relations, saidPresident Barack Obama has full powers to pardon the Cuban Five.

Morales pointed out that "there was no evidence against them, and as forthe charge that they were not registered as agents in the United States,they have already served their time for that."

In his view, the Cuban Five represent a clear case of political aggressionagainst Cuba. "It is a scandal that they should hold these men in prison,while terrorists and criminals (of Cuban origin) like Luis Posada Carrilesor Orlando Bosch can stroll around the streets of Miami," he said.

Speaking to IPS in Havana, Morales replied laconically "there may besomething in it," when asked about supposed negotiations which theArchbishop of Havana, Jaime Ortega, may be mediating.

Early this month, Cardinal Ortega visited Washington, where he met withWhite House National Security Adviser James Jones and Assistant Secretaryof State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Arturo Valenzuela, feeding rumoursthat releases might be announced soon.

Earlier this year, talks between Ortega and authorities led to thegovernment's announcement that it would release 52 imprisoned dissidents.

But Morales cautioned that there have been no substantial changes inrelations between Washington and Havana since Obama "confirmed he wouldmaintain the blockade, to which he clings as a vital element of his Cubapolicy."

In his view, Obama has "divided the blockade in two, if that werepossible," and is using it "intelligently, like the two blades of a pair ofscissors against Cuba." According to his analysis, the U.S. president is,on the one hand, taking measures to facilitate closer relations with Cubancivil society, and on the other hand, "tightening his fist against theCuban government."

"This division pursues subversive goals, it is being used to createinternal pressure, to exploit the economic difficulties of our country,which are indeed urgent. If Obama has not spent more time on this it isbecause he has other pressing priorities, and he does not regard Cuba as adanger in any way," the expert remarked.

In early August, Tourism Minister Manuel Marrero confirmed plans to build16 golf courses, as part of a project that would include the sale of housesto foreigners in those areas. Apparently the government is already preparedto wager on an end to restrictions on travel by U.S. citizens to Cuba.

"There are hopes that the travel restrictions may be lifted, and we shouldbe prepared for anything that may happen. We must get ready for tourism ona mass scale, and that demands higher standards. In any case, this is notan issue that involves the blockade, but a constitutional right of U.S.citizens that has been denied," Morales said.

In this respect, Morales has no doubt that pressure in the U.S. Congresswill keep mounting and will lead to the approval of a bill to lift thetravel ban, and to allow more U.S. exports of food to Cuba. In June, thebill received the support of the House of Representatives Committee onAgriculture.

"The debate may incline towards lifting the travel ban, to the extent thatit is appreciated that good business can be done with Cuba. In order forthat to happen, our economy must improve, otherwise no capital will enterthe country," Morales said. (END)

Send your comments to the editor

Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:12 GMT

IPSNEWS in RSS/XMLFollow Us On FacebookFollow Us On Twitter IPS Inter Press Service News Agency

HAVANA, Aug 16, 2010 (IPS) - "I still view corruption as an extraordinarydanger" to the country, as its "corrosive power" makes it a matter of"national security," said Esteban Morales, who was expelled from the CubanCommunist Party (PCC) after publishing an article warning of its pervasiveeffects.

Morales has appealed to the PCC, in accordance with his rights under thestatutes of the ruling party, which is the only political party recognisedin Cuba.

"A commission has to analyse the appeal and make a decision. If I am notsatisfied with the decision, I can take the case as far as the partycongress. I will continue to appeal, because I think I have good reasons todo so," he told IPS in this interview.

Meanwhile he remains "very active" as an academic and researcher, althoughhe will retire in September from the teaching staff at the Centre for theStudy of the Hemisphere and the United States (CEHSEU) at the University ofHavana, which he helped to found and to which he has devoted a large partof his professional life.

"I'm retiring at 68. I'll have more time and freedom for my academic workand research," said Morales, who holds doctorates in science and economicsand is an expert on Cuba-U.S. relations, as well as the author of essays,books and numerous articles on the equally sensitive subject of racism inhis country.

Q: Since your separation from the PCC was made public, you have preferredto avoid contact with the press, especially foreign journalists. What madeyou change your mind and agree to this interview?

A: I think it is salutary to clear up certain points. Some people have saidI was a privileged person, a security (secret service) agent, and now Iwish to say this: No one will ever unearth any privileges of mine, becauseI have none. As for being a security agent, if I were, I would be proud ofit, because in Cuba that is an honour.

My curriculum vitae is what speaks for me. I am a true academic, not aninvented one. I have written dozens of works, not always on straightforwardsubjects, as well as doing a lot of teaching, lecturing at conferences andacting as an academic adviser. If anyone has any doubts, they need onlyenter my name into Google.

Others have taken delight in the idea that I might change sides and go overto the "dissidents." Perhaps the counter-revolution, lacking as they are inleadership, thought that I could fill that gap for them. But people whoreally know me, know that that's impossible, and that I'm a firmlycommitted, tenacious revolutionary. Furthermore, I have never had anypretensions to leadership or sought to be the centre of attention.

Q: Have you never wavered in your political convictions?

A: No, never. Even the sun has its sunspots; different evaluations arealways possible. I may have given room to mistaken interpretations,although the spirit of the things I have written is clear, and they clearlycome from a revolutionary position.

I was a revolutionary before I was a party activist, and I will continue tobe one. I decided my political stance over 50 years ago, and it was my freechoice. I have never liked to play the lying game.

I am not paralysed by what has happened. I will simply be much more carefulabout how I express myself and what I write, but I won't stop doing it. I'man intellectual whom the revolution has trained to warn honestly aboutthings that can damage us, and that is what I have always done. These arethe risks one just has to run.

Q: Doesn't the fact of your punishment, after you publicly expressed yourviews on corruption and the risks it poses for the country's political andsocial stability, contradict President Raúl Castro himself, who said Aug. 1that unity "is nurtured and harvested within the broadest possiblesocialist democracy and in open discussion of every issue, howeversensitive, with the people"?

A: I believe debate and criticism are being encouraged by Raúl and theparty leadership. But there may be circumstances in which someone at somelevel does not quite agree.

I must say that exercising a critical approach is much more complex thanthe mere decision to do so. It has to do with the structures, thepersonalities and the different understandings people sometimes have ofthings. Or perhaps part of what I said could have been said in a differentway. There's a big gap between intentions and the way they are put intopractice.

Q: What do you think is most worrying about corruption?

A: Its corrosive effect from the moral perspective. When morality andethics are affected, the prestige of our political system is undermined andeverything goes downhill. That's why I agree with those who say corruptionis a national security problem.

However, it won't be solved just through more inspections and paperwork,but by being on the alert and creating mechanisms to prevent it, so thatpeople who handle money and resources are constantly held accountable. Ourcountry's assets really do belong to the people, it's not just talk.

Q: You are very well known for your work on the United States and itsrelations with Cuba, and on racism. What prompted you to write aboutcorruption, an issue that, according to some government sectors, encouragescampaigns to discredit the country if ventilated in public?

A: I wrote those articles because I believe these are the problems we arefacing now. I have a motto: in the context of what we have lived throughover all these years, I think whoever wants to be a revolutionary has towage his own war, fight his own battles and run whatever risks there are.Otherwise he should just stay home and hide under the bed.

The claim that the enemy will take advantage of an open discussion ofcorruption does not immobilise me either, because it isn't the enemy thatis going to solve the problem for us: quite the contrary. I am one of thosewho think that sometimes it is healthier for us to recognise ourshortcomings ourselves, than for the enemy to fling them back in our teeth,or save them up against us, which would be worse.

Q: Who are you referring to when you say "enemy"?

A: We cannot close our eyes to the fact that since the late 1980s, thefocus of U.S. policy towards Cuba has changed. Nowadays, everything that ishappening internally on the island is being observed and monitored by U.S.politicians and especially by the United States' special services.

It is against this backdrop that I view the problem of corruption, which Istill see as an extraordinary danger. (END)